Posted on 09/29/2009 4:09:26 AM PDT by Man50D
I have seen actual quotations from contemporary sources on this subject, but I have not been building a database. I’d have to go back an research it again as I can’t remember where I ran across it. The objection was that the Brits were too absolute and rigid, and that they didn’t make any allowance for the voluntary disavowal of allegiance.
Look, this discussion sometimes seems emotional, especially at this time in our history, whereas in the past it was only an oddity of our history, a peculiarity of the Constitution. I’d expect that you would agree that anyone born of two American parents within the polity of the United States would be without question a Natural Born Citizen, but you also believe that that either qualification in the absence of the other would be sufficient.
Lets just disagree on this point, but agree that SOME meaning must be attached to the phrase, that there was SOME concern about divided loyalties in a President, and that there was SOME characteristic that distinguished Natural born Citizenship from citizenship that could be more simply described with the single word.
You might say that the distinction was between natural born and naturalized, and I would agree, provided that you meant by that the distinction between “natural born” and ALL forms of citizenship derived from the operation of statute law enacted by Congress under the authority of the naturalization clause.
We’ll see where this goes over the next few months. You may be right - that it will go nowhere. I think that it will be adjudicated, and I do have a dog in the fight - there is a hoped for result. But I can’t predict the actual outcome; that will have to await the fullness of time.
And has a new partner in crime "the wise Latina".
Comparing Obama's birth to McCain can be somewhat misleading.
On the other hand, like you, I too "agree with most of it."
The most important point is that the founders were concerned -- lest foreign powers corrupt the executive branch.
Requiring the executive to be born of two citizen parents ("natural born")would seem to go a long way toward preventing such a mishap, whereas, born of a non-citizen father would seem to leave a lot of wiggle room for abuse of the presidency... abuse that I find it hard to believe the sagacious framers of the constitution would have allowed.
In, any case, I avoid confusion by focusing on what I believe to be the original intent of the founders in this case, namely: to prevent undue foreign influence on the executive.
That said, Obama may have problems even IF he were born in Hawaii.
STE=Q
Thank you and I too like you. I also appreciate all your efforts. We all need to stick together to report the truth and educate to save our Republic.
As you, I too believe our national security is the most issue at hand and I am not against children born to military being eligible, but it needs to be changed in the proper and legal manner.
The congress has had this in the works for nearly a decade and to get McCain through, they dropped their efforts for ALL military and reworded it for just “John Sidney McCain III” which was completely ‘unconstitutional and McCain being the decorated and highly respected naval officer he was, he should have stepped up and did the honorable thing and pushed for the original bill, in its original form that referred to ALL military families.
With that one indiscretion, McCain lost my support and my respect. He put politics ahead of country and national security by helping to put the smoke screen up for Obama and his eligibility problem.
So now, we shall pray that Leo & TerriK ‘s effort are fruitful. It is all in God's hands and his plan for this nightmare we are in will soon unfold.
You can start here:
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/naturalization/naturalization_text.html
also here, commentaries of early congressional records:
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_2_1s9.html
I hope this helps, though I do not believe you will find the exact phrasing, but then again, I have been known to miss the mark once in a while and I am happy to admit when I do.
Best wishes in your search :)
here’s more on naturalization & early American citizenship:
I, like Ginsburg’s grandson was born overseas to U.S. citizen parents and am a natural born citizen as I did not have to go through a naturalization process.
You have a limited, unimaginative and incorrect view of what naturalization means. You are limiting it in your mind to adult naturalization where there is a formal process of swearing allegiance, getting a naturalization certificate, etc.
However, the true meaning of a "naturalized" citizen is any citizen who obtains his or her citizenship through the action or by means of a statute enacted by Congress under the power granted to it by the "naturalization clause" of the Constitution.
Your citizenship is of this type. It is a form of naturalized citizenship, despite that it is granted at birth and no oath of allegiance is required. It is not a form of Natural Born Citizenship, despite what you may think or wish. If it were not for the action of the statute law, enacted by Congress granting citizenship to individuals in your circumstances, they, and you, would not be citizens of the United States at all.
The US Senate passed a resolution recognizing John McCain, who was born over seas to American parents as a “natural born citizen”, so I do not see why I would not be considered an NBC.
I wouldn’t think it necessary to point out that Senate Resolutions are non-binding and without the force of law, to say nothing of them falling considerably short of the Constitutional Amendment that it would take to re-define “natural born citizen” to mean something different that it was understood by the Framers.
In other words, the Senate could pass a resolution averring that John McCain is a Red Delicious apple, but he would still not make good eating from the hand, even if he dangled himself from an apple tree.
As I and others have pointed out many times - and even the State Department has cautioned folks over - any citizenship rights that are enjoyed by Americans born abroad exist solely through the operation of statute law enacted by Congress under the Naturalization clause of the Constitution.
Congress does not have the plenary power to bestow Natural Born status on anyone, born anywhere under any set of circumstances. Even John McCain, and even you, in order to have Natural Born citizenship, must be endowed with it at birth, and you must have it by the operation of Natural Law, absent any statute, or even any Constitution.
This kind of citizenship is even more fundamental and basic that the Constitution itself, and that’s why the Constitution merely refers to it without defining it. It was something that preexisted the Constitution.
It is the kind of citizenship that a person naturally enjoys when NO competing loyalties or allegiances could possible exist, and that comes from the birth of an individual within a polity to parents who themselves do not pass on any competing loyalties, allegiances or obligations of fealty by blood.
Such an individual is said to be a natural born citizen. Neither you, nor John McCain, nor my son Gerald fall within that class of citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.